04-12-2010, 09:15 AM
<!--quoteo(post=88240:date=Apr 12 2010, 08:07 AM:name=Scarey)-->QUOTE (Scarey @ Apr 12 2010, 08:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=88226:date=Apr 11 2010, 10:26 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Apr 11 2010, 10:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=88222:date=Apr 11 2010, 10:22 PM:name=Coach)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Coach @ Apr 11 2010, 10:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=88218:date=Apr 11 2010, 11:14 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Apr 11 2010, 11:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=88215:date=Apr 11 2010, 10:09 PM:name=Coach)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Coach @ Apr 11 2010, 10:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=88211:date=Apr 11 2010, 10:48 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Apr 11 2010, 10:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=88209:date=Apr 11 2010, 09:38 PM:name=Coach)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Coach @ Apr 11 2010, 09:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->It was a bad contract then, it is a bad contract now, and it will be a bad contract next year.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That won't be our problem.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If we trade him, then we will still pay a portion of the contract.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thanks.
Explain Rule 5 now.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You said the contract wont be our problem next year.
I said yes it will, because we will either pay all of it for him to suck for us, or a portion of it to trade him in a salary dumping move.
So either you thought it was a one year deal, or you cant comprehend simple things.
I will let you be the judge.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Or I don't think...and never thought we <i>wouldn't</i> end up paying half his contract next year to be rid of him. It's built in and I'm already over it. It's a shit signing.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But why wouldn't that be our problem next year if we're still paying him next year.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I dunno. Is Bradley our problem this year? I mean yes...he's costing us money but no...he's Seattle's problem now. Hendry's not smart enough to get replacement-level position players or relief pitchers to sign one year deals. It almost goes without saying that just because someone plays for the Cubs for a year, they're not just getting paid for a year.
That won't be our problem.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If we trade him, then we will still pay a portion of the contract.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thanks.
Explain Rule 5 now.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You said the contract wont be our problem next year.
I said yes it will, because we will either pay all of it for him to suck for us, or a portion of it to trade him in a salary dumping move.
So either you thought it was a one year deal, or you cant comprehend simple things.
I will let you be the judge.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Or I don't think...and never thought we <i>wouldn't</i> end up paying half his contract next year to be rid of him. It's built in and I'm already over it. It's a shit signing.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But why wouldn't that be our problem next year if we're still paying him next year.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I dunno. Is Bradley our problem this year? I mean yes...he's costing us money but no...he's Seattle's problem now. Hendry's not smart enough to get replacement-level position players or relief pitchers to sign one year deals. It almost goes without saying that just because someone plays for the Cubs for a year, they're not just getting paid for a year.